Michigan And Arizona Republican Primary Night

Update: Is it Michigeddon for Romney tonight? All the polls close at 9:00 although some close at 8:00 ET.

Is it Ariztopia? All the polls close at 9:00 p.m. ET there too.

——————————————————————————————

We’ve always wondered why Mitt Romney never made Michigan the centerpiece of his campaign. Why, didn’t Romney ever make it clear that he could win Michigan in the general election (as well as Nevada) and therefore the Obama campaign would collapse in November? Well, now we know why.

If Romney loses Michigan tonight he is the bride stripped bare. But, if Mitt Romney wins Michigan tonight he can still make the case we thought would be a winner for him, but with diminished credibility (unless it is a big win). Tonight we will soon enough find out how strong Romney’s claim to Michigan is but we do know that the Obama campaign is worried:

“What you’re seeing here. Michigan is very key here in a national election. More important to democrats. Democrats, Obama has to have this state. If Obama and Romney are fighting over Ohio, that’s a swing state. If they’re fighting over Michigan, Obama’s in trouble. And, I think that’s why you’ve seen this extraordinary effort by the Obama camp during this last week to interfere in this primary. They’re running ads about the auto bailout which Obama thinks plays well here, trying to mobilize that base, that auto base in getting them primed for the general.”



The Obama campaign and the DailyKooks are trying to destroy Mitt Romney in Michigan. It’s why the tin plated calf gave a speech today of all days to the United Automobile Workers. The strategy might work. But, as the saying goes, “that which doesn’t kill you makes you stronger.

If Mitt Romney thinks he has a difficult time, if Rick Santorum or Newt Gingrich or Ron Paul think they have had a hard time with these powderpuff “dirty tricks” they are fools. It’s going to be much uglier and much dirtier for the eventual nominee. That’s why for all the yelping about how the nomination race hurts them, the bottom line for Republicans is that the tough and ugly nomination fight is making them stronger and better able to react and respond to the slime machine from Chicago.

As to Rick Santorum, we frankly can’t stand the sanctimonious slow-blinker, but tonight he can show that he can actually win blue collar voters. Having lost his last general election race by double digits Santorum has to prove his claim of being able to get those white working class voters to actually vote for him. This does not mean trying to get non-Republican votes in order to eek out a victory as the sanctimonious slow-blinker has done.

It is appropriate for Mitt Romney to blast Santorum for robocalling Democrats in the open Michigan primary because this is not an actual expression of democratic support by the electorate but rather DailyKooks mischief making in order to deny Republicans the right to determine their own nominee. Hillary Clinton supporters recall with disgust the Republican led “Operation Chaos” contempt for the people’s will which took place in 2008.

We’ll know soon enough what happens in Michigan and pretty much everyone is agreed that Mitt Romney will win in Arizona. Newt is not playing in either state so it’s a Mitt and Rick show. We think Romney will win both states. We’ll be watching to see what the margins of victory are in both states.

Share

Winter Warning: Obama And Google

Never before have we written an article to discuss technology issues or internet algorithm issues. We will today because it is important for readers of Big Pink to be aware that changes are coming on March 1 from Google that invoke privacy issues. Below, we will make some suggestions as to what readers might want to do to protect themselves. Remember – Google is an Obama supporting corporation and we do not put anything past Obama and his henchmen.

But first we know some of you require a bit of politics everyday and polls are the spice of political life. So a little bit of polling information is the first course in today’s meal.

A respected Battleground poll has horrid news for Republicans running against Obama. One of the Battleground pollsters does think that this poll is particularly alarming however. Republican Goeas says this is “a transitional period” and things will change. Goeas: “This is normal and to be expected during this period of time when you have an ongoing primary … and an incumbent with no challenge.”

Nothing is normal or expected these days. USAToday (Gallup) has a swing state poll which is horrid news for Barack Obama Hopium guzzlers and those who think the boob has a chance of winning in NOvember. The USA Today Poll shows Obama trailing Romney and Santorum in Swing States:

“What happens when an incumbent running for re-election has a signature achievement in his first term that voters strongly dislike? Barack Obama has that problem with ObamaCare among swing-state voters, and finds himself behind both of the leading Republicans in the new USA Today poll of these states: [snip]

•Former Pennsylvania senator Rick Santorum tops Obama 50%-45% in the swing states. Nationwide, Santorum’s lead narrows to 49%-46%.

•Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney edges Obama 48%-46% in the swing states. Nationwide, they are tied at 47% each. [snip]

It’s a deeply significant sign that Obama can’t rise above his divided competition despite the battles taking place in the opposition party, and ObamaCare significantly drives that — even as Obama continues to campaign on his “achievement.”

Don’t forget one last thing, too. Democrats purposefully front-loaded the benefits of ObamaCare in 2010 in a desperate attempt to avoid a beating in the midterms. ObamaCare won’t get any more popular between now and the election, and it’s likely to get less popular.

Agreeing with Gallup on OBooberama’s unpopularity is the Rasmussen poll:

“The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Monday shows that 26% of the nation’s voters Strongly Approve of the way that Barack Obama is performing his role as president. Forty-two percent (42%) Strongly Disapprove, giving Obama a Presidential Approval Index rating of -16 (see trends). That’s the president’s lowest rating in over a month. [snip]

For the first time since late December 2011, Mitt Romney leads the president in a hypothetical 2012 matchup. Romney earns 45% of the vote, while the president attracts support from 43%. Romney holds a nine-point advantage among unaffiliated voters.

For the first time ever, Texas Congressman Ron Paul also leads the president. In that matchup, 43% prefer Paul and 41% Obama. Ten percent (10%) would vote for some other option, a figure that includes 17% of Republicans.

If former Senator Rick Santorum is the Republican nominee, the president leads by two, 45% to 43%. With former House Speaker Newt Gingrich as his opponent, the president enjoys a 10-point lead, 49% to 39%.”

* * * * * *

As to Obama lovin’ Google, we’re going to rely on some good articles from other websites. As Obama ramps up his thug operation many of you might recall the 2007/2008 harassments and thuggery that spewed from the Hopium Guzzlers as they were unleashed on those of us not addicted to the Hopium.

Legal Insurrection:

“Google is revising their privacy policy in March, though, and it doesn’t look up my alley (and it probably won’t be up yours). So don’t wait for some dopey Congressman to slap a large, sweeping law that will invade more of your personal liberties (think SOPA). Take matters into your own hands and enter a 21st century frame of mind, one filled with personal responsibility: How to Remove Your Google Search History Before Google’s New Privacy Policy Takes Effect (courtesy of the Electronic Frontier Foundation).”

The ugly new Google Privacy Policy may be read HERE.

The Electronic Frontier Foundation (with good screen captures which make the process easier to understand):

“On March 1st, Google will implement its new, unified privacy policy, which will affect data Google has collected on you prior to March 1st as well as data it collects on you in the future. Until now, your Google Web History (your Google searches and sites visited) was cordoned off from Google’s other products. This protection was especially important because search data can reveal particularly sensitive information about you, including facts about your location, interests, age, sexual orientation, religion, health concerns, and more. If you want to keep Google from combining your Web History with the data they have gathered about you in their other products, such as YouTube or Google Plus, you may want to remove all items from your Web History and stop your Web History from being recorded in the future.

Here’s how you can do that:

1. Sign into your Google account.

2. Go to https://www.google.com/history

3. Click “remove all Web History.”

4. Click “ok.”

Note that removing your Web History also pauses it. Web History will remain off until you enable it again.

[UPDATE 2/22/2012]: Note that disabling Web History in your Google account will not prevent Google from gathering and storing this information and using it for internal purposes. It also does not change the fact that any information gathered and stored by Google could be sought by law enforcement.

With Web History enabled, Google will keep these records indefinitely; with it disabled, they will be partially anonymized after 18 months, and certain kinds of uses, including sending you customized search results, will be prevented. If you want to do more to reduce the records Google keeps, the advice in EFF’s Six Tips to Protect Your Search Privacy white paper remains relevant.

If you have several Google accounts, you will need to do this for each of them.”

Disabling your history probably will be a problem in accessing the Blogger web sites run by Google. But any Hillary Clinton supporter will recall the abuses and mass blocking of Hillary supporter websites by Blogger in 2007/2008. Most Hillary supporting websites left Blogger and joined those of us who ab initio blogged at WordPress.

The EFF’s Six Tips To Protect Your Search Privacy may be read HERE.

Pajamas Media also has good information on the March transition by Google:

“How to remove your Google search history before the new “privacy” terms go into effect.

Also, in the nine days I’ve been using Do Not Track Plus, it’s blocked nearly 37,000 tracking attempts. If you haven’t already downloaded it (it’s free), you’re missing out on a much, much faster browsing experience.”

That’s right, you might want to take some more steps not to be “tracked”:

“Do Not Track Plus — just go and download it right now. It’s a free browser plugin for all the bigs. Not only does it block companies from tracking your web browsing, it really speeds up your page load times.”

Do Not Track Plus can be accessed HERE. Do Not Track Plus also has a video which will help you understand the process and why it should be undertaken. It is a free tool.

You might also want to start searching without Google.

Startpage is a search engine which does not violate your privacy.

Ixquick is another search engine that does not violate your privacy.

Hide My Ass is a service that prevents your IP address from being used to track you.

We’re only warning you not telling you what to do. Some of these “fixes” might bring problems of their own such as the aforementioned problem with Blogger. Because Google owns websites such as YouTube there might be problems there as well. Best of luck to us and to all as we navigate Google March Madness.

Don’t say I never warned you.”



Share

Barack Obama Apologizes, Hillary Clinton Stands Strong

Update: Republicans the new anti-war party now that the Obama left is silent and not protesting war? Today, Newt Gingrich to Afghanistan: Maybe it’s time for you to live your miserable lives on your own. Rush Limbaugh too is wondering whether it is time to say “to hell with the place.”

——————————————————————————————

Barack Obama has been busy apologizing again. Korans/Qurans which were no longer Korans/Qurans because they had been “desecrated” and indisputably become terrorist communications devices instead, had to be burned (not buried as usually required for not desecrated, legitimate, Korans/Qurans).

Obama immediately apologized and trials are promised for the not yet chosen American/NATO victim(s) who thought he/she was duly performing the appropriate procedure for dealing with terrorist communications. Americans are getting killed for disposing of terrorist communications and it is Barack Obama who apologizes. Obama’s butt ugly “face” gets uglier by the second because those “young Muslims” he was supposed to seduce have not fallen in love with their thin suitor.

A real American president would not bow to the corrupt. A real American president would have made the case that the burned Korans/Qurans were terrorist communications devices which desecrated the holy book for adherents of Islam. But no, Barack Obama apologized for front line troops doing their job. A personal apology to the president of Afghanistan. Barack Obama has declared for all departments and all spokespersons of the government that apologies which comfort America’s enemies are the order of the day.

Compare and contrast – a presidential performance par excellence:



Pity China and Russia. They have no fear or respect for Barack the Boob. But Russia and China have in Hillary Clinton a person of substance and an adversary to respect and fear.

When Barack Obama weaseled his way into the Rezko House White House Hillary Clinton faced a dilemma. Hillary Clinton knew Obama was treacherous and she should not join the cabinet, but Hillary worried about abandoning America to the inexperienced treacherous boob at a time of peril.

Hillary Clinton succumbed to her “responsibility gene” and opted to represent America, try to save the world, and keep the State Department and American foreign policy as safe from Obama’s henchmen and women (think Samantha Powers, Tom Donolin, the anti-Israel crowd around “Arabs’ Lawyer” Barack Obama, Denis McDonough, and Susan Rice). as much as she possibly could.

So yesterday Hillary Clinton was in Tunis, Tunisia – not apologizing but speaking forcefully the way an American leader should speak. Hillary Clinton, in an Arab/Muslim capital did not only denounce the killers in Damascus. Hillary Clinton spoke powerfully to China and Russia and denounced their actions in protecting Syria’s Assad as “despicable”:

“Speaking after a Friends of Syria conference, held in Tunisia, Mrs Clinton said that Russia and China must join international condemnation of President Assad’s regime.

“It’s quite distressing to see two permanent members of the Security Council using their veto while people are being murdered – women, children, brave young men – houses are being destroyed,” she said.

It is just despicable and I ask whose side are they on? They are clearly not on the side of the Syrian people.”

They are not on the “side of the Syrian people” just as surely as Barack Obama is not on the side of American troops in Afghanistan.

Whatever one thinks about American policy in Afghanistan and Syria is not the issue. The issue is that an American president should forcefully represent American policy and interests and not apologize reflexively. In Tunis, Tunisia Hillary Clinton forcefully enunciated American policy and fearlessly condemned powerful Russia and China.

Safe in the golf courses of Washington D.C. Barack Obama whimpered with new apologies which afflict America’s friends and comfort America’s enemies.

Share

Barack Obama’s Butt Ugly Face – Plus: Marco Rubio Joins Jeremiah Wright’s Church?

Two news items today make us mock JournoLister Ben Smith and drug sniffing dog Andrew Sullivan.

Ben Smith’s big Buzzfeed “scoop” today is that Florida Republican Senator Marco Rubio has Mormon roots. Rubio was a Mormon at age 8!

When at Politico Ben Smith became obsessed investigating this sweet pink website. Ben Smith did not bother to investigate all the many allegations against Barack Obama – he was too busy investigating us.

While at Politico the world discovered, via leaks, that Ben Smith was on the JournoLister listserve. The JournoListers were not just pundits but also “news reporters”. Ben Smith reported that while on JournoListers he did not find anything worth reporting. But indeed the JournoListers conspired to kill the Jeremiah Wright news story (you remember – “God Damn America”).

Ben Smith did not report there was an coordinated explicit effort by the JournoListers to defend Obama by calling Hillary Clinton supporters “racists”. This race-baiting tactic is already in play for 2012 against Republicans. This is what we wrote at the time of “God Damn America”:

“Ben Smith is either delusional or a liar. He says he never found any “good secrets” at JournoList nor was he troubled by the “groupthink”. He apparently found nothing “germane”. But the fact remains that a coordinated campaign to label Hillary Supporters and any opponent of Barack Obama as “racists” – by the Left wing of the journalism establishment! – is one hellava story – if Ben Smith had reported it at the time of the “bitter and clingy” Pennsylvania primary!

Ben Smith pretends JournoList was a silly collection of Drudge and Limbaugh haters and killers but the story is much more nefarious than the strawman Smith builds then knocks down. We corrected the not functioning link in the Ben Smith article which he claims as some sort of badge of honor for Politico because they were “the first publication to report on the list”. What Ben Smith fails to mention is that that “report on the list” came in 2009 well after the information would have been useful to the Hillary Campaign and the McCain/Palin campaign.”

Recently the Daily Caller exposed the obvious fact that Ben Smith was a sludge dumping operation for pro Obama organizations. Therefore we are not surprised that Ben Smith continues to be fed information by Obama’s campaign and has been called on to take down Marco Rubio or that Smith tries to inject “complications” into the Marco Rubio story.

Since age 13 Marco Rubio has been a Catholic and was “confirmed” at that age as a Catholic. That Rubio attended a Mormon church before he was a teenager hardly seems a story but we appreciate as much information about candidates and potential presidential/vice presidential candidates as possible. But does Ben Smith really think that the 8 year old Marco Rubio attending a Mormon church is really a problem for Rubio who has been a Catholic since age 13?

Betcha if Marco Rubio was in a church wherein “God Damn America” resounded from the pulpit on the Sunday after 9/11 the JournoListers would be in a frenzy to denounce those America haters.

To be fair to the JournoListers and Ben Smith in particular, they are the crew who thought that Obama living in Indonesia at age 10 was foreign policy experience. So maybe Ben Smith is not just being a running dog for the Obama campaign but instead really thinks that 8 year old Marco Rubio is The Omen that must be destroyed.

Speaking of dogs, let’s recall Andrew Sullivan sucking off Barack Obama. For those that still want to believe in the tin plate calf Obama, the promises Barack Obama made in 2007/2008 and the case made for his election by drug sniffing dogs like Andrew Sullivan, are the best way to demonstrate what an utter failure Obama is. This was the case Sullivan made for electing Barack Obama:

“At its best, the Obama candidacy is about ending a war—not so much the war in Iraq, which now has a mo­mentum that will propel the occupation into the next decade—but the war within America that has prevailed since Vietnam and that shows dangerous signs of intensifying, a nonviolent civil war that has crippled America at the very time the world needs it most. It is a war about war—and about culture and about religion and about race. And in that war, Obama—and Obama alone—offers the possibility of a truce.”

By Sullivan’s and Obama’s own measure we can calculate the miserable failure that is Obama. There is no truce. There is only more war about culture, religion and race. Hey Andrew, we were right and you are still wrong.

And that face? That butt ugly face? Let’s quote some more from drug sniffing dog Andrew Sullivan as he masturbates to pictures of B.O.:

“What does he offer? First and foremost: his face. Think of it as the most effective potential re-branding of the United States since Reagan. Such a re-branding is not trivial—it’s central to an effective war strategy. The war on Islamist terror, after all, is two-pronged: a function of both hard power and soft power. We have seen the potential of hard power in removing the Taliban and Saddam Hussein. We have also seen its inherent weaknesses in Iraq, and its profound limitations in winning a long war against radical Islam. The next president has to create a sophisticated and supple blend of soft and hard power to isolate the enemy, to fight where necessary, but also to create an ideological template that works to the West’s advantage over the long haul. There is simply no other candidate with the potential of Obama to do this. Which is where his face comes in.

Consider this hypothetical. It’s November 2008. A young Pakistani Muslim is watching television and sees that this man—Barack Hussein Obama—is the new face of America. In one simple image, America’s soft power has been ratcheted up not a notch, but a logarithm. A brown-skinned man whose father was an African, who grew up in Indonesia and Hawaii, who attended a majority-Muslim school as a boy, is now the alleged enemy. If you wanted the crudest but most effective weapon against the demonization of America that fuels Islamist ideology, Obama’s face gets close. It proves them wrong about what America is in ways no words can.

Yup, according to Andrew Sullivan it was to be Barack Obama’s “face” that would make “them” love “us”. So how does that promise hold up? How are those young Muslim’s reacting to the “brown-skinned man whose father was an African, who grew up in Indonesia and Hawaii, who attended a majority-Muslim school as a boy”? Do they love us now? Do they really really love us?

As if. Young Muslims are burning Barack Obama in effigy.

The “young Muslims” are not exactly enchanted with Obama’s face. Fact is those “young Muslims” are burning in effigy “Black Dog Obama“. It turns out “young Muslims” don’t admire Obama’s face but rather believe Obama’s face is butt ugly.

Obama’s response to being called “Black Dog Obama” and the killing of two Americans? “Obama Apologizes For Koran Burning Incident In Afghanistan.” The “young Muslims” rejected Butt Ugly Obama’s apology.

It appears by the standards set by Barack Obama and Barack Obama fellators Obama is an abject failure. According to the Gallup Poll today, the majority of Americans agree Barack Obama is a failure.

Barack Obama is not the only failure (“Poll: 50% now say Obama doesn’t deserve reelection“). The JournoListers and fellow traveling fellators of Big Media are also losers. They placed their bets on a butt ugly face thinking it was the face of a prince. For all time “the face” argument will be there to show future generations of Americans how corrupt Big Media is and how Barack Obama bamboozled a nation.

If Ben Smith’s Buzzfeed had any integrity it would have included in it’s Marco Rubio at age 8 story the fact that Barack Obama attended a Muslim school at a later age. If Andrew Sullivan had any integrity he would….. Well now we are just being silly. Integrity and “Andrew Sullivan” don’t mix.

Share

#20 – The CNN Arizona Michigan Republican Debate

Update: It was a tough night for Santorum. Maybe he should have taken our advice and shown up with ashes on his forehead to at least distract from the disaster.

Santorum sounded like John Kerry of “I voted for it before I voted against it.” For Santorum it was an “I was against it before I voted for it” moment:

“ROMNEY: Just a — just a brief comment. Senator, I just saw a YouTube clip of you being interviewed where you said that you personally opposed contraceptives but that you — you said that you voted for Title X. You…

(CROSSTALK)

ROMNEY: But you used that as an argument, saying this is something I did proactively. You didn’t say this is something I was opposed to; it wasn’t something I would have done. You said this — you said this in a positive light, “I voted for Title X.”

(LAUGHTER)

SANTORUM: I think it’s — I think I was making it clear that, while I have a personal more objection to it; even though I don’t support it, that I voted for bills that included it. And I made it very clear in subsequent interviews that I don’t — I don’t support that...

(BOOING)

… I’ve never supported it, and — and have — and on an individual basis have voted against it.”

Ron Paul pounced like a hungry monkey on a ripe banana as he punched Santorum for being “a fake”.



On the Arlen Specter endorsement and support for No Child Left Behind it was a tough night for Santorum without respite.

Newt Gingrich did well tonight and should certainly be “cheerful”. Romney must be smiling too.

—————————————————————————————–

It would be nice to be a member of the Roman Catholic Church today. We could then give up Republican debates for Lent. But no such luck.

Diligently, we will watch tonight’s Republican debate at 8:00 p.m. on CNN. Tonight’s debate is presumed to be important to next week’s voting in Arizona and Michigan. If Romney loses Michigan much of the rationale for his candidacy will disappear. So watch we will.

Last August in one of the first debates we declared that none of those on stage would be the Republican nominee. The stage that night was populated with Santorum, Gingrich and Romney. Maybe we were wrong, but maybe we are right. Who knows? There is a poll in which a Republican plurality prefers Christie to Palin or Jeb Bush as the dark horse nominee. Again, who knows?

So watch we will tonight. Maybe Santorum will wear ashes on his forehead this Ash Wednesday. Or maybe recent Catholic convert Newt Gingrich will outwit Rick and appeal to the evangelical vote with such a sly move. Ashes on the forehead would be an elbow in Mormon Mitt Romney’s ribs too.

Share

Obama’s Government By Purposeful Disaster: Iran, Nukes, The Economy, Payroll Tax Cut, Social Security, Contraception, And Crony Capitalism Solyndra/LightSquared

It becomes increasingly impossible to question the notion that Barack Obama is purposefully destructive.

Consider: Nuclear Pakistan is unreliable and possibly a rogue state in the making; Iran wants a nuclear bomb no matter what and threatens to barbeque Israel; Russia and China are blocking the United States at every turn, most lately on Syria. The Obama response? Propose unilateral American reductions in nuclear weapon stockpiles to the level of China’s stockpiles.

Consider: The more the economy deteriorates the more Barack Obama profits politically. Americans forced in desperation from even bothering to look for jobs leads to a drop in the unemployment rate and Barack Obama smirks a clown smile and goes on yet another vacation.

Consider: Obama Dimocrats rejoice that Barack Obama has outmaneuvered Republicans on the payroll tax issue. Left unmentioned by the left Obama Dimocrats – the destruction of Social Security.

Consider: Barack Obama relied on the Catholic Bishops to pass his health scam. The treacherous Barack Obama betrayed MILLIONS of women and codified the Hyde Amendment into law in order to get the votes to pass his health scam. Barack Obama then goads the Catholic Bishops on an issue that will at most affect a few hundreds of women (if we accept the notion that this is about contraception not religious liberty), not the MILLIONS previously betrayed, and the Obama left along with some out-of-their-depths-analysts-we-all-know-so-well, shout Hosannas at Obama the great liberator of women.

Consider: Crony capitalism for Solyndra and millions in donations from Wall Street while Obama agitates on behalf of Occupy Wall Street.

It’s government by willful, purposeful, destruction of America for personal political profit – but it won’t work to save this corrupt clown from Chicago.

On each of these issues Barack Obama pretends to vote “present” or both “yes” and “no” in the HOPE that Americans are as stupid as he thinks they are. After all, Barack reasons, they did elect him so they really are stupid.

But reality, like justice, has its own wheel which grinds slowly but inexorably. On each issue Obama’s chickens are coming home – ready to poop.

On Obama’s nuclear weapons downgrade of America’s might: Americans know that America has too many nuclear weapons. But reductions in these stockpiles should be negotiated in order to bring down all the stockpiles of nuclear weapons. It makes no sense to propose unilateral nuclear reductions when Iran seeks nuclear weapons. It is a sign of weakness and a green light to trouble makers like Iran when they see the United States response to their nuclear armament program to be another variation of “no preconditions”. It is a purposeful disaster created by Barack Obama.

This nuclear reductions proposal is an Obama dog whistle to Iran and other rogue states – “do as you please, I’ll protect you.” But Obama can’t protect anybody from Israel and Israel is not stupid.

In 2009 when Barack Obama gave his much ballyhooed (by Big Media) speech to the “Muslim world” the real message was not the hideous speech which distorted history. The real message to the “Muslim world” was an American president going to the Middle East but snubbing Israel (Obama still has not visited Israel). The speech was bad enough but the real message was in the medium of the snub. Israel hating Arabs and however many Israel hating Muslims heard the Obama dog whistle to them.

Not content with the damage he purposefully caused in 2009, in 2011 Barack Obama launched another hateful speech which we denounced as a “Pearl Harbor” style attack against Israel. Now reports state that Obama will try to protect Iran from Israel at his meeting with Netanyahu on March 5. It won’t work. Israel will defend itself from Iran and from Barack Obama

[For background information on this story of the March 5 meeting, see our previous articles discussing Hillary Clinton and Netanyahu versus “Arabs’ lawyer” Barack Obama. As to Tom Donilon and his “caustic” conversations with Netanyahu, remember he is the thug assigned to take down Hillary Clinton and he is still angry that she ditched him when he was the assigned enforcer against her at the Munich Security Conference.]

Consider: The economy. We remember March of 2009 and the Big Media hyping of the economic wonders to come once Obama got his stimulus scam passed. We remember the “Glimmers of Hope” that were fools gold. We remember the “Recovery Summer” that wasn’t in 2010. We remember Joe Biden years ago saying with great pride that the economy was about to start producing 400,000 jobs a month and more. Didn’t happen.

About the only real good economic news has been the warm weather this “winter” which has provided a respite to beaten down Americans. But the weather was not Barack Obama’s doing unless you are one of those Hopium addicts that believes all that Barack does turns to gold.

The warm weather brought down expenses for many Americans and that has helped bring up the level of optimism. But much like a befuddled groundhog that unwittingly makes a false forecast and lifts up spirits for a day, this too shall pass. Already gas prices soar and Americans are once again getting sour on the economy.

The economy is in dire straits. This is your Obama recovery:

“But if you look a little further into the numbers, you see that the American job market is not better off than it was four years ago. Indeed, it’s a lot worse.

On Inauguration Day in 2009, when Barack Obama took office, the unemployment rate was 7.8 percent (up from 4.4% as recently as May of 2007). Notwithstanding his promises that Porkulus would cap unemployment at 8.5%, it soared to 10% in October of 2009, and didn’t dip down below 9% in any sustained way until last fall. Last month, after three years of Obama, it was at 8.3% – or .2% lower than where he said it’d never get above if we spent what he proposed.

That’s bad.

“But 8.3% is better than 10%, right?”

Sure – if all you’re doing is comparing numbers straight-up. But by itself, the unemployment rate is meaningless. It’s a percentage of people out of work – but who are those people? They are the ones that are participating in the labor market.

And fewer Americans than ever -ever! – are doing that! [snip]

The media is spinning nonstop about the “Obama recovery”. It’s vapor; in terms of percentage of the American workforce actually working, there is no recovery.

Are you better off than you were four years ago, America?

No – you’re doing two percent worse.”

Recovery Summer is still in relapse. The only thing that has happened is what we predicted: as the elections approach Big Media will trumpet anything that even remotely appears to be “good” and bury anything that can hurt their brass idol.

“But the rising polls for Obama!” shout the denizens of the Hopium dens. Sorry “creative class” boys, Barack Obama is less popular than George W. Bush after his eight years in office. That poll is from a Democratic leaning polling firm too. As to the Republicans who are waging ice-pick warfare against each other and getting everyone worried? The latest Rasmussen tracking poll shows Romney and Santorum within 2 points of Obama.

Consider: The payroll tax issue as described by Politico:

“Republicans freely acknowledge that the president outmaneuvered them on the payroll tax holiday last December — a fight that lasted into February — and his political dexterity during a recent contraception contretemps has left the GOP on the defensive on an issue that seemed to give them the upper hand just a week or so ago.”

But the payroll tax issue so praised by the hypocrite left and out of depth analysts is another example of purposeful destruction for short term political profit:

“Sen Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, just laid into the payroll tax deal stating his “vehement opposition” – and slammed Obama AND Biden, saying, “I’m dismayed that a Democrat – incl a Dem Pres and a Dem VP -are willing to sign a deal that will begin the unraveling of Social Security.”

He doesn’t like the revised/reformed unemployment benefits system — a tiered system that gives more to out-of-work Americans who live in states w/ high unemployment. Harkin, from a low-unemployment state, said, “If you’re unemployed, you’re unemployed.”

Grave warnings peppered the speech — including this: “I choose my words carefully. Make no mistake about it – American ppl – this is the beginning of the end of Social Security.”

We were right when we warned in 2007 about Obama and his hate of Social Security and old people (like his grandma). Seniors are not part of Obama’s “situation comedy” coalition.

Consider: Contraception/Abortion, the red flags. This election is not going to be about abortion nor contraception. Republicans know “it’s the economy, stupid.” This is more crazy making from Barack Obama. It’s a distraction to make people forget about his signing the Hyde Amendment onto his health scam and taking half a trillion dollars away from Medicare.

Consider: Crony capitalism. Yes, Mr. Kessler there really is a crony capitalist in the White House. Was it in 2007 that we began to ask questions about Obama purchases of biotech stocks? Stocks purchased along with some big Obama donors? Yup. 2007. But throughout the health care debate no one seemed to think that might matter.

Only now, in 2012, do we read articles about LightSquared and Obama donors. It’s an ugly story that reeks of crony capitalism. Crony capitalism is the problem. The problem is socialism for the rich and irresponsible who got a bailout when they placed their bets. The problem is scorched earth laissez-faire capitalism for the poor.

The crony capitalism practiced by Barack Obama is purposeful and for his own personal political profit, at the very least. It’s destructive of capitalism. We’re not surprised. Barack Obama is all about purposeful destruction.

Share

Did Race-Baiting Kill Whitney Houston? Plus Sarah Palin On HOPE And CHANGE

Two big events this weekend. First, Sarah Palin.

The Hot Airs are asking “Why Isn’t Sarah Running?:

“Her CPAC speech today was a barn-burner, hitting every conservative, small-government point and pumping out soundbites that will no doubt resonate in the public dialogue for days to come. Some of my favorites:

Drain the Jacuzzi!”

“This government isn’t too big to fail, it’s too big to succeed.”

“We don’t want an economy built to last, we want an economy built to grow.”

“This is Obama’s Washington.”



Other Hot Airs laser focused on another line from Sarah Palin at CPAC: “The door is open …”

“The former Alaska governor — who frequently appears on national TV before a natural background that looks pretty remote from D.C. — really hit her stride midspeech as she denounced “the permanent political class” and knocked the District.

“Often, politicians come to D.C. denouncing it, but, after a year, they decide it’s not a cesspool, but a hot tub,” she said to laughter.

It’s up to voters to drain the jacuzzi, she said, before she declared that the grassroots will do just that — by sending more Tea Partiers to Congress.

“This time, Establishment,” she said (and I’m pretty sure she looked sternly over her glasses at just that moment), “we expect them to get leadership positions in Congress.”

Her closing sentiment? “The door is open.” It’s hard not to find that sentence provocative — especially given that she repeated it throughout the speech — but she seemed to have meant it in the sense that the door is open to defeat Barack Obama and to take back the nation. The crowd considered the alternate meaning, too, though, to judge by chants of “Run, Sarah, run!” Who knows what might happen before this long primary ends?”

For us however the best line from Sarah Palin was the one about Hope and Change:

“Palin’s speech got the biggest reaction of any at CPAC — much more so than any of the presidential candidates. The audience gave her standing ovation after standing ovation and some even yelled “Run Sarah run!” — more telling of the GOP field’s inability to connect with voters than any poll.

Palin zeroed in on President Obama. The current state of the economy “is not a failure of the American people,” she said. “It is the failure of leadership. We know how to change that, oh yes we do. Oh yes we can,” she said, echoing Obama’s campaign line.

“Hope and change – yeah, you gotta hope things change.”

“He says he has a jobs plan to win the future. WTF, I know,” Palin said, spelling out W-T-F.”

“Hope and change – yeah, you gotta hope things change.” Can’t say it better than that.

* * * * * *

The death of Whitney Houston was the second big event this past weekend. The Grammy Awards are on tonight and they will turn into a memorial for the great voice. Over the next weeks more memorials will saturate the airwaves until most every ounce of emotional resonance is drained from this sad event.

Already Al “leave no corpse unexploited” Sharpton has tried to insert himself into Houston’s coffin with unnecessary pronouncements. Sharpton will not be alone. Just about everyone everywhere will join in and pronounce judgement on this festival of funeral. Most will denounce Bobby Brown and drug use. The great drug of celebrity and fame will come in for attacks and analysis as well. We’ll throw in our own incendiary question: Did race-baiting destroy or even kill Whitney Houston?

In the most widely read article about Whitney Houston’s death we read about how Houston “ruled as pop music’s queen until her majestic voice was ravaged by drug use and her regal image was ruined by erratic behavior and a tumultuous marriage to singer Bobby Brown”. We read how Houston was the “golden girl of the music industry.” A recording and movie star. “She had” we were told “the perfect voice and the perfect image: a gorgeous singer who had sex appeal but was never overtly sexual, who maintained perfect poise.” Then came drugs, plummeting sales, wack behavior, and a ravaged voice.

Houston we now all know was Aretha Franklin’s goddaughter as well as “the daughter of gospel singer Cissy Houston and the cousin of 1960s pop diva Dionne Warwick.” She was a star:

“Houston first started singing in the church as a child. In her teens, she sang backup for Chaka Khan, Jermaine Jackson and others, in addition to modeling. It was around that time when music mogul Clive Davis first heard Houston perform.

“The time that I first saw her singing in her mother’s act in a club . . . it was such a stunning impact,” Davis told “Good Morning America.”

“To hear this young girl breathe such fire into this song. I mean, it really sent the proverbial tingles up my spine,” he added.

Before long, the rest of the country would feel it, too. Houston made her album debut in 1985 with “Whitney Houston,” which sold millions and spawned hit after hit. “Saving All My Love for You” brought her her first Grammy, for best female pop vocal. “How Will I Know,” “You Give Good Love” and “The Greatest Love of All” also became hit singles.

Another multiplatinum album, “Whitney,” came out in 1987 and included hits like “Where Do Broken Hearts Go” and “I Wanna Dance With Somebody.”

So what killed Whitney Houston? Was it race-baiting that drove her into the arms of Bobby Brown?:

“The New York Times wrote that Houston “possesses one of her generation’s most powerful gospel-trained voices, but she eschews many of the churchier mannerisms of her forerunners. She uses ornamental gospel phrasing only sparingly, and instead of projecting an earthy, tearful vulnerability, communicates cool self-assurance and strength, building pop ballads to majestic, sustained peaks of intensity.”

Her decision not to follow the more soulful inflections of singers like Franklin drew criticism by some who saw her as playing down her black roots to go pop and reach white audiences. The criticism would become a constant refrain through much of her career. She was even booed during the “Soul Train Awards” in 1989.

Sometimes it gets down to that, you know?” she told Katie Couric in 1996. “You’re not black enough for them. I don’t know. You’re not R&B enough. You’re very pop. The white audience has taken you away from them.”

Did the race-baiting beast kill the beauty? Is that need to reject the white audience that embraced you in order to be “likable enough” “black enough” the elemental cause of Houston’s death? Is that what led to Bobby Brown?:

“Some saw her 1992 marriage to former New Edition member and soul crooner Bobby Brown as an attempt to refute those critics. It seemed to be an odd union; she was seen as pop’s pure princess while he had a bad-boy image and already had children of his own. (The couple had a daughter, Bobbi Kristina, in 1993.) Over the years, he was arrested several times, on charges ranging from DUI to failure to pay child support.”

Whitney Houston herself rejected all the anti-Bobby Brown theories. She said “their true personalities were not as far apart as people may have believed. When you love, you love. I mean, do you stop loving somebody because you have different images? You know, Bobby and I basically come from the same place. You see somebody, and you deal with their image, that’s their image. It’s part of them, it’s not the whole picture. I am not always in a sequined gown. I am nobody’s angel. I can get down and dirty. I can get raunchy.”

Unlike many of the people we write about we never met Whitney Houston. We never met Bobby Brown. Their lives were/are their own to live. We’re not going to dissect the issue of whether or not Bobby Brown is the devil in this story or whether Whitney Houston was on a path she would have found on her own. It’s none of our business even if it does sadden us when great talent is wasted.

But there is no doubt that Whitney Houston was attacked for “selling out”, being “too white”. And that is something we have deplored. [By the way, anyone want to see Barack Obama compared to an evolving monkey? Check out the racist New York magazine cover.]

Movie star Samuel L. Jackson in an Ebony Magazine interview this week stated that “I voted for Barack because he was black. ‘Cuz that’s why other folks vote for other people — because they look like them … That’s American politics, pure and simple. [Obama’s] message didn’t mean [bleep] to me.” Congratulations SLJ, you are crude and vote on skin color not content of character but at least you are not lying about your motivations or fooled by phony “hope and change”.

The (birthday celebrating) women at PUMA PAC have a refrain, a warning: Vote For Women. Perhaps they are right. Perhaps that should be the sole consideration in this new political world polluted by Obama and his race-baiting acolytes. Just vote for women.

We never supported Hillary Clinton just because she is a woman. Perhaps though that is the only consideration we should have from now on.

Share

Hey Catholics, Hey Feminists, Obama Cannot Be Trusted

We have a catechism at Big Pink based on logic and experience that never fails:

Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.

Picture our chagrin and giggles every time some fool belatedly reaches the same conclusion we did so many years ago. Our latest converts are most Catholic leaders and some monumentally stupid “feminists”.

How monumentally stupid are these “feminists”? It’s 2012 and it is a revelation to them that Obama does not have feminist interests as a priority. These monumentally stupid “feminists” somehow missed the betrayal of women by Obama during his scam health care legislation days as well as the misogyny and sexism of their number one Boob.

Monumentally stupid “feminists” will attempt to delude themselves and others that Barack Obama’s latest vote getting ploy is about women’s rights or contraception or some such. Nonsense. It is about Obama getting votes. As soon as Obama sees the numbers not working out as he expected prepare for a monumental flip-flop from the flim-flam man which will be forgiven by monumentally stupid “feminists”. [Already Joe Biden is getting ready to flip the flop – On the new contraception rule, I’m determined to see a compromise here.]

Eleanor Clift provides some clues to monumentally stupid “feminists”:

“Did Obama Administration Pick a Fight on Birth Control Deliberately?

The president is ‘very sensitive’ to concerns about his policy mandating that Catholic institutions provide contraception coverage—but did the administration incite the enraged response to fire up young liberal voters? [snip]

It’s a gamble that could cost Obama some support among Catholics, a swing group of voters in presidential elections, even as it highlights the divide between the president and his GOP rivals.

With Rick Santorum opposed to contraception and Mitt Romney declaring he would cut family planning from the federal budget, Charlie Cook wonders if the White House deliberately picked this fight now, knowing where it would go. He points out that for all the talk about Republican primary turnout being down, Democrats aren’t that keen on their guy either. [snip]

The election won’t turn on these kinds of cultural issues, but they can generate emotion and passion. Obama’s job approval is just above 50 percent among younger voters, a group that gave him 66 percent of their vote in 2008. “They’ve got to get young people jazzed up, and there are very few issues that get young women more jazzed up than contraception,” says Cook. Indeed, the Obama campaign website highlights the issue of contraception, along with the fact that it will be free once the Affordable Care Act is implemented.”

The once admired Gloria Steinem presumably is still among Obama admirers and will continue to raise money for Obama once he stabs these monumentally stupid “feminists” in the back.

As monumentally stupid as these fake Obama lovin’ “feminists” are, what impolite insults should we direct at Catholic Church leaders? Our once full pantry of insults is not stocked up sufficiently to serve up fresh insults. We’ll have to settle for “monumentally stupid Catholic leaders”.

Jonathan Last filed an informative report a few days ago which staggered us with the monumental stupidity of Catholic leaders:

“On the last weekend of January, priests in Catholic churches across America read extraordinary letters to their congregations. The missives informed the laity that President Obama and his administration had launched an assault on the church. In Virginia, Catholics heard from Bishop Paul Loverde, who wrote, “I am absolutely convinced that an unprecedented and very dangerous line has been crossed.” In Phoenix, Bishop Thomas Olmsted wrote, “We cannot​—​we will not​—​comply with this unjust law.” In Pittsburgh, Bishop David Zubik wrote that President Obama had told Catholics, “To Hell with your religious beliefs.” Bishop Daniel Jenky of Peoria asked his flock to join him in the Prayer to St. Michael the Archangel, which concludes: By the Divine Power of God / cast into Hell, Satan and all the evil spirits / who prowl about the world seeking the ruin of souls.

It was a remarkable moment, in part because despite their stern reputation, most Catholic bishops are not terribly conservative. They tend to be politically liberal and socially cautious. If they were less holy men, stauncher conservatives would call them squishes. [snip]

The beginnings of this confrontation lay in an obscure provision of Obama’s Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, which stated that all insurers will be required to provide “preventive health services.” When the law was passed, “preventive” was not defined but left to be determined at a later date.

This past August, Health and Human Services secretary Kathleen Sebelius finally got around to explaining the administration’s interpretation of the phrase. Based on a recommendation from the Institute of Medicine, the administration would define “preventive health services” to include contraceptives, morning-after pills, and female sterilization. And they would interpret the “all insurers” section to include religious organizations, whatever their beliefs.”

“To be determined at a later date” should be called “the Barack Obama treachery contract clause”. Think Keystone.

Having passed a pig in a poke legislative health scam the pig in a poke president determined what was good for his electoral prospects at “a later date.” Boobery ensued:

“In the Catholic world, for instance, a diocesan office often employs lots of people​—​lawyers, janitors, administrative staff​—​who are not necessarily Catholic. And the duties of such offices extend far beyond inculcation of the faith​—​to include charity, community service, and education. Or take Catholic universities. There are more than 200 of them, serving some 750,000 students. They clearly do not fit the exemption. Neither would any of the 6,980 Catholic elementary or secondary schools. Nor the country’s 600 Catholic hospitals; nor its 1,400 Catholic long-term care centers. Ditto the network of Catholic social services organizations that spend billions of dollars a year to serve the needy and disadvantaged.

As soon as Sebelius released this decision, the Catholic church panicked. The Conference of Catholic Bishops reached out to the administration to explain the position in which it had put them. But the tone of their concern was largely friendly: Most Catholic leaders were convinced that the entire thing was a misunderstanding and that the policy​—​which was labeled an “interim” measure​—​would eventually be amended.”

This staggered us. Monumentally stupid Catholic leaders thought Obama could be trusted????? Ha!

How monumentally stupid are Catholic Church leaders? Read it and weep:

“The reason for this optimism was that more than a few important Catholics had previously climbed out on a high branch for Obama politically, and for his health care reform as a matter of policy. Despite what you may read in the New York Times, most lay Catholics are nominally at home in the Democratic party. (Remember that a majority of Catholics voted for Obama in 2008.) And what is true of the laity goes double for those in religious life. In 2009, Notre Dame president Father John Jenkins welcomed President Obama as the school’s commencement speaker in the face of a heated student protest. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops mostly kept its powder dry during the fight over Obamacare, and very few members of the church hierarchy actively, or even tacitly, opposed the bill. Others, such as Sister Carol Keehan, the president of the Catholic Health Association, actually lobbied in favor of it, early and often. So most Catholics took the president at his word when he met with Archbishop Timothy Dolan last fall and assured him that when the final version of the policy was eventually released, any fears would be allayed.

That was their mistake.”

Pity the Catholic faithful! Led like lambs by monumentally stupid Catholic Church leaders. We weep. They trusted Obama. They ignored our catechism:

“Obama telephoned Dolan on the morning of January 20 to inform him that the only concession he intended to offer in the final policy was to extend the deadline for conformity to August 2013. Every other aspect of the policy enunciated by Sebelius would remain rigidly in place.

It’s unclear whether Obama anticipated the blowback which resulted from this announcement, or perhaps even welcomed the fight. The liberal Catholic establishment nearly exploded. Sister Keehan was so horrified she threw her lot in with the more conservative Dolan in full-throated opposition to Obama. Cardinal Roger Mahony, the spectacularly liberal archbishop emeritus of Los Angeles, wrote, “I cannot imagine a more direct and frontal attack on freedom of conscience.  .  .  . This decision must be fought against with all the energies the Catholic community can muster.” Michael Sean Winters, the National Catholic Reporter’s leftist lion, penned a 1,800-word cri de coeur titled “J’accuse!” in which he declared that, as God was his witness, he would never again vote for Obama. The editors of the Jesuit magazine America denounced a “wrong decision,” while the Washington Post columnist E. J. Dionne called the policy “unconscionable.” When you’ve lost even E.J. and the Jesuits, you’ve lost the church.”

Jonathan Last ends his informative article with some of the reasons why the Catholic Church will fight this ruling to the death. Last even brings up the possibility that the Catholic Church would catastrophically shut down services rather than comply:

“Which means that what is actually on the block are precisely the kind of social-justice services​—​education, health care, and aid to the needy​—​that liberal Catholics believe to be the most vital works of the church. For conservative Catholics, Obama merely confirmed their darkest suspicions; for liberals, it was a betrayal in full.

As a matter of law, this decision by Obama’s health care bureaucrats seems unlikely to survive. Last month, the Supreme Court struck down another attempt by the administration to bully religious believers in the Hosanna-Tabor case. In that instance, Obama’s Equal Employment Opportunity Commission argued that a religious organization does not have the right to control its hiring and firing according to its religious belief. The Court struck down this argument 9-0 in a rebuke so embarrassing that Justice Elena Kagan came close to openly mocking her successor as Obama’s solicitor general during oral arguments. It was the kind of sweeping decision that should have deterred the Obama administration from forcing Catholics into complying with the health insurance mandate, because it suggested that the Court will very likely side against the administration once this matter comes before it. [snip]

The trick, of course, is that when Sebelius issued the final protocol, her lone concession was the one-year delay in implementation. Which, for Obama, has the happy side-effect of pushing the moment of enforcement to August 2013. Meaning that no legal challenge can come until after the 2012 election. Which suggests that the thinking behind the policy may be primarily political.

Readers of Big Pink are not surprised. Barack Obama voted “present” in Illinois whenever it was convenient for him. Anyone recall the credit card vote by Obama?

Anyone cheering on Obama is sure to be disappointed. If you cheer on Obama or believe Obama – you are monumentally stupid. Stop voting. You are stupid if you believe Obama or any word that comes out of his mouth. Already Obama prepares to Abandon ship, his own, and “at least five senate democrats now oppose Obama’s new contraception rule”. The reports that Obama has doubled down on the new contraception rule at a Democratic retreat” will soon flop over and flip. Stupid is as stupid does.

The Crawdads noted today that Glenn Greenwald is much too late to the de-stupidfication party. The stupid staggers. It’s not just Catholics and fake “feminists” that are monumentally stupid. Recall this bit we wrote about “environmentalists” and labor unions just a short while ago:

“Obama supporters, the cannon fodder left, the hypocrites on Hopium, don’t care about the issues. They pretend they care about the issues but they don’t. Consider the Keystone Pipeline issue (which we will discuss at length at a more appropriate time). As bad as Barack Obama is on this issue our condemnations are reserved for labor union bosses and the phony “environmentalists.”

We understand the political motivations for Barack Obama to vote “present” on the pipeline. We condemn Barack Obama’s refusal to take a stance one way or the other on the pipeline. But what is much more contemptible and disgusting are the phony environmentalists and the self interested labor union bosses.

The labor unions support the Keystone pipeline and believe it will create tens of thousands of jobs. Environmentalists are opposed to the Keystone Pipeline and believe it will hare the environment. Or so they all say.

Our “J’accuse” is directed at these corrupt labor union bosses and phony environmentalists (throw in Occupy Wall Street and those who remain enablers are issue after issue and continue to protect Obama) who put aside their constituents, principles, and positions in order to protect Barack Obama. Why don’t the labor union bosses and the environmentalists get together and demand BEFORE THE ELECTION that Barack Obama take a position NOW.

The labor union bosses and the phony environmentalists won’t demand a clear cut position from Obama BEFORE THE ELECTION because they are protecting him. If they really cared about jobs or the environment they would demand a “yes” or “no” from Barack Obama. Instead these corrupt entities accept Obama’s “present” but not voting ploy.

Disgusting.

On FISA the hypocrites of the left accepted, with fawning thanks, Obama’s lies and snubs. On the Keystone Pipeline labor bosses and phony environmentalists protect Barack Obama. The left and the Obama Dimocratic Party protect Obama on his unconstitutional recess appointments even though they know that their stance is unprincipled and will come back to bite them. Disgusting.”

“Disgusting” is right. Why anyone views this latest Obama treachery/boobery as an Establishment Clause issue or an “our bodies ourselves” issue is beyond us.

We’ve had it right all along:

Obama simply cannot be trusted. Obama cannot be trusted on any issue. Obama cannot be trusted by his friends. Obama cannot be trusted by his enemies. Obama cannot be trusted.

Share

Nevada Caucus Results And This Year’s Most Important Video

There has been a lot of important and interesting news this past week. But nothing is more important to watch from this past week than the below video. Three minutes and 15 seconds into the interview it is, thus far, the video of the year:



On May 7, 2009 we advised the secret weapon be unleashed. Trump does just that very thing in this interview.

Who ran the most negative campaign? Against whom? Against what woman and against what men?

Four minutes into the interview Trump lays it out, hits it out of the ballpark. Who ran the most negative campaign?

Clinton hater Sean Hannity finally discards his silly Bill Clinton impressions and learns from The Donald how to use the secret weapon – four minutes and ten seconds into the interview.

Sean Hannity has long been an E/I conservative. With this interview Hannity demonstrates he can become an I/E conservative. “Intelligence over Emotion“.

Who was the “least racist person” who was race-baited by Barack Obama? Ask Sean Hannity. Ask Donald Trump. Ask Bill Clinton. Ask Hillary Clinton.

Tonight Mormon Mitt Romney will likely win a big victory in the heavily Mormon populated state of Nevada. How much easier will it be for Mormon Mitt Romney to be smeared as a “racist”?

The “least racist person”, Bill Clinton was smeared as a “racist” by Barack Obama. We Hillary Clinton supporters, many of whom organized and worked for years to community organize in black neighborhoods and fought more for civil rights than Barack Obama ever did, were smeared as “racists” by Barack Obama and his Chicago thugs. How much easier will it be for Mormon Mitt Romney to be smeared as a “racist”?

Already Jim Clyburn who smeared Bill Clinton as a racist has begun the racist smears against Mitt Romney.

Some Republicans/conservatives will giggle at us and say “yeah we know all that about the soon-to-come “racist” smears attack and we are ready for it and we don’t need your advice or to use your so-called stupid “secret weapon” so just shut up and let us go about our business you losers.” To those E/I Republicans/conservatives we say that the election will be determined by the vast and growing number of independents.

Independents need to be educated on the race-baiting smear tactics of Barack Obama. Republicans/conservatives might be all too happy to know that Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton were race-baited. But Independents voted repeatedly for Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton.

To remind Independent voters that Barack Obama smeared Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton, as the race-baiting smear campaign against the eventual Republican nominee commences, is smart politics.

Race-baiting is all Obama has left. The Obama job approval among uncommitted voters is at 20%. More states continue to move into the GOP column. The race card, race-baiting is all that is left.

Whatever happens today in the Nevada caucuses the GOP presidential nomination race will continue. Whoever wins the nomination will then face unprecedented race-baiting and screams of “racist”. Donald Trump showed the way to respond. Sean Hannity is learning how to respond.

Whoever the Republican nominee is will have to learn how to respond.

Share